On Wed, Jul 3, 2019 at 12:17 PM Dave Fisher <dave2w...@comcast.net> wrote: > > On Jul 3, 2019, at 11:50 AM, Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jul 2, 2019 at 10:28 AM Dave Fisher <dave2w...@comcast.net> wrote: > >> > >> Hi - > >> > >>> On Jul 1, 2019, at 1:30 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz > >>> <bdelacre...@codeconsult.ch> wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> On Sun, Jun 30, 2019 at 1:39 AM Justin Mclean <jus...@classsoftware.com> > >>> wrote: > >>>> ...I put up suggested text changes for an incubator disclaimer here > >>>> [1]... > >>> > >>> Basically just adding this, right? > >>> > >>>> Some of the project releases may not follow ASF policy or have > >>>> incomplete or unknown licensing conditions.... > >>> > >>> It works for me but I'd say "incubating project" to be clearer. > >> > >> How is this? > >> > >> “Some of the incubating project’s releases may not be fully compliant with > >> ASF policy. For example, releases may have incomplete or unreviewed > >> licensing conditions. Known issues will be described on the project’s > >> status page." > > > > I would suggest we have a policy where known issues are actually > > listed in the DISCLAIMER itself. Along the lines of: > > > > "Some of the incubating project’s releases may not be fully compliant > > with ASF policy. For example, releases may have incomplete or > > unreviewed licensing conditions. What follows is a list of known > > issues the project is currently aware of (note that this list, by > > definition, is likely to be incomplete):” > > -1. > > This only works for issues known before a release is cut. It does NOT WORK if > the issue is discovered during the release vote. Why? Because we are trying > to allow the release to go through without redoing it and this would require > reworking the release. > > I would rather do it outside of the release. Policing the actual DISCLAIMER > is not easily feasible and decreases the burden. > > If this is the decision then it leads to a choice that is worse than the > status quo.
Nobody is suggesting the policing bit. What I'm suggesting is a central place for that information to be collated. Whether that becomes a showstopper for a release gets decided by the VOTE. But what I'm saying is that we shouldn't be in a position where we have to hunt for *known* and *acknowledged* issues all over the place (JIRA, mailing lists, wiki, website, etc.). Lets at least make sure we make our downstream consumer's life a bit easier. Thanks, Roman. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
